Can someone please tell me the difference between the Canon 50mm f/1.4 and the f/1.8? I'm a beginner! :) Thanks!
40105
The 1.4 is going to give you better bokeh (that beautiful blurry light) and a shallower depth of field. It also lets more light in. Hope that helps!
40106
In short. How much bokeh effecf there is. How much is in focus.. The 1.4 will blur your background more than the 1.8. I have the 1.8 and it works great for me.
40107
The "f" setting determines the aperture or the opening of the shutter to allow light to enter the camera. The larger the number the less light that the lens lets in. f/1.4 lets in more light than f/1.8. The aperture also helps to determine the depth of field so that both of these settings would provide for a good focus on the subject with the background blurred for close-up photography.
1163546
I have both lenses and while at first glance you may not notice the difference too much, if you spend some time comparing side by side and zooming in you'll notice the 50mm gives all round better results in crispness, colour and clarity.The 18-55mm is a decent lens for a kit lens and I still make use of it but I do side more with the 50mm when the situation calls for it, like street photography.
1346885
Yes, I have to agree with Henry. The 50mm f1.4 is more versatile in the long run. The single most useful point being that, depending on your camera model, you have in effect anything from a 65mm f1.4 to an 80mm f1.4. This falls ideally into the portrait lens range. It's a lens that I still use frequently, especially when using a film body. Both are first rate lenses with excellent sharpness & contrast, but I think that you'd find that the 50mm f1.4 would be used more often..
86637
Depends on what you are going to use it for. I have the 1.8 50mm and the 1.4 85. The 85 1.4 has much more versatility for portraits and can create amazing blur beyond what the 1.8 can. It also allows for a faster shutter when shooting portraits of young kids(which helps with movement). Lastly, it is an amazing macro lens, but unless you are really into that, the 1.8 is sufficient in my humble opinion
1674522
I bought the 24-105 lens recently because I thought the IS would make up for my lack of a higher aperture in low-light situations. It does to an extent, but I have decided that I want the f/2.8 for other reasons. So I'm trying to sell my 24-105 so I can buy the 24-70. I do wish the 24-70 had IS, but it's really not necessary because it's just a faster lens. It really depends on your use. If you are using it for weddings, you may want to consider the 24-70 because of the faster focusing and better handling in low-light situations. If you are using it for a general walk-around lens, the 24-105 will do just fine. I love mine and I almost want to keep it and buy the 24-70, but I can't afford both right now and I need the 24-70 for my business. You can see some sample photos from the 24-105 at my website: www.sarakelley.net. Email me there if you want more input or have any questions.
1163547
Fixed lens are ALWAYS sharper and the 1.8 is great in low light situation. Kit lens are not as sharp and usually slower (3.5 or 5.6) and therefore limit ur shooting possibilites. If u want a zoom spend the money for a fast one (2.8). I never buy kit lens. I bought d3200 body and 50mm 1.8vs and i have used it very often for newspaper gigs recently in a variety of lighting situations. The extra sharpness and speed payed off. My shots were crisp and clear when printed in the newspaper.
840152
Thank you guys, really appreciate you help. I was in confused state in selecting sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 or tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 macro, but after a week study i have selected this sigma 50-150mm which is exactly in my budget. Once again thank you guys.
735070
As far as build quality goes the 40 beats it without question, also a lot smaller. The 50 on the other hand does have a larger aperture for more blurred backgrounds and better in low light. They are both very sharp. I do perfer the auto focus on the 40 over the 50. If you want to save 100$ go with the 50. You won't be let down with either lenses. I own both
578411
What camera bodies do you currently own and for what type of shooting?? For portrait, people love the 85, some even say they prefer the 100mm. I own the 50L, the only thing I can say is that shooting at f1.2 takes practice, and the auto focus is a bit slower than most other modern day lens with AF.
2127846
I don't know that the image will be noticeably sharper. I also have the 50mm 1.8 and was very pleased with the results. I would have gotten a 35mm 1.8 (to save some money) if it was offered but it only came as 1.4. I use it on my D800 and love it!
1346889
I use the 50mm f/1.4 for almost everything. Although it is harder to get objects from far away, it is amazing what you can get out of it. The shallow depth of field is just top notch.
1521074
I have a Nikon D70s and I purchased the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 D lens. I can shoot in f/22 only every other f/ tells me FEE. What is going on? The lens did not come with troubleshoot mode and it says the Nikon D70s is compatible. I'm lost :( Help anyone? Thanks!
659560
Hi glenn: how the 105 mm compares with the 85mm f/1.4 lens for portrait shots thank you for your advice
739838
I suppose it has nothing to do with the cameras and all to do with that particular lens. For the price of the 50mm 1.4G plus it being a prime lens I figured it would focus super quick. It's funny that you bring up the 35mm 2.0 D lens having problems. I own that lens also and mine focuses just fine and much faster than the 50mm 1.4G. I'd love to hear what you find out from Nikon about this problem.
1008810
The 50mm f/1.8 will be able to gather more light than the 35mm f/2.4 and will provide a "nicer" bokeh so it is better suited for portrait photography (indoor or outdoor). It's main drawback compared with the 35mm with be the field of view (50mm becomes a 75mm whereas 35mm becomes approximately a 52mm on pentax DSLR). What it means is that in a close and restricted environment you won't be able to put everyone in the frame. Outside, the 50mm is better, inside, it depends. For kids sporting events you might want to use longer focal length (at least 100mm or higher) and fast lenses if the event is indoor (at least f/2 or lower). I wouldn't recommend any of the ones you talked for this. I have both a 50mm and a 35mm. I love both, and use them both during family gatherings or things like this. I also use my 35mm for landscape photography. Honestly it's a matter of taste.
709667
Hi!I did some shots with both lenses to compare, and I noticed that the 50mm has more beautiful background with a better "bokeh", but in a crop sensor camera like D3000, the angle of view is very narrow. The 35mm also has a great background too, with nice "bokeh", just a little bit less then the 50mm, but the 35mm as more angle of view, thus you eventually don't need to stay too far from the subject to take a full body shot. I think both of them are great, image quality and sharpness. I think that if you don't have none of them, try to start with the traditional 50mm, then go for the 35mm. Or buy both of them. It's your choice!Hope I made myself clear.Higor Hi!I did some shots with both lenses to compare, and I noticed that the 50mm has more beautiful background with a better "bokeh", but in a crop sensor camera like D3000, the angle of view is very narrow. The 35mm also has a great background too, with nice "bokeh", just a little bit less then the 50mm, but the 35mm as more angle of view, thus you eventually don't need to stay too far from the subject to take a full body shot. I think both of them are great, image quality and sharpness. I think that if you don't have none of them, try to start with the traditional... » Read More Hi!I did some shots with both lenses to compare, and I noticed that the 50mm has more beautiful background with a better "bokeh", but in a crop sensor camera like D3000, the angle of view is very narrow. The 35mm also has a great background too, with nice "bokeh", just a little bit less then the 50mm, but the 35mm as more angle of view, thus you eventually don't need to stay too far from the subject to take a full body shot. I think both of them are great, image quality and sharpness. I think that if you don't have none of them, try to start with the traditional 50mm, then go for the 35mm. Or buy both of them. It's your choice!Hope I made myself clear.Higor « Show Less
714416
Here is a greast site for lens discussions. www.dpreview.com Go to the forum for Canon lens talk. The 50mm 1.8 is a great portrait lens. It's fantastic in low light conditions. Just treat it with utmost care as the build is not great and there have been many of a complaint on how easy it can fall apart. As a previous poster mentioned the EF-S 17-85 is a good choice. It has full time manual focus with IS. As an every day multi purpose lens this is a nice lens. I also have this lens. The only problem I have with it is the low light shots. It is too slow. If used with External Flash it is fine. That's why I bought the prime lens. I just have to use my feet for zoom. You are going to have a lot of fun using AV mode with the 50mm and playing around with WB and ISO. Enjoy!